The task ahead: from an ugly present to a better future

CIA director, William Burns, is right to warn us that the next few weeks will get ugly. This is code for worse than anything we have seen yet in the first two weeks of this merciless war.

More experts — not a majority — are reckoning that we might already be in World War Three. More former NATO and national military are switching opinion and now support direct limited intervention by NATO to protect civilians from further Russian brutality.  

But for all the grim news, there is reason to hope.  Most wars experience their “better new world to follow” moment. I ’ m holding out for a long-overdue reset of the global architecture, institutions, and culture that might follow and help prevent another future global security calamity. The now-awakened free and democratic nations have to step up and mobilise others to join forces to defend the global order and to future-proof our strategic thinking and institutions in order to withstand and face down 21^st century tyranny and aggression.

How ugly is ugly?
William Burns ’ s reference was directed at the likelihood of weeks of Russian artillery and air bombardment of Ukrainian cities, as Putin doubles down and his forces grind on. Particularly chilling is the introduction of Chechen irregulars, whose speciality is the dirty work that is too much for the Russian military.

Nevertheless, given the formidable Ukrainian resistance, the quantities of defence weaponry pouring in, and the first signs of meaningful negotiations, there must be hope that Aleppo and Grozny scale civilian casualties might be avoided. The alternative is that Putin deems the capital to be his centre of gravity, and reverts to type, opting to “destroy Kyiv in order to occupy it”.

That said, fighting and casualties usually spike in the final stages pre-ceasefires and diplomatic settlement as combatants jockey for negotiating leverage. NATO-Russia escalation risks have increased. A senior banking figure told me their risk assessment for crossing the threshold to some form of nuclear action is now close to 10 per cent. Daniel Finkelstein and the strategic guru, Professor Sir Lawrence Freedman, have been talking nuclear in The Times. Various FT and respected think tank commentators have raised the unlikely — but conceivable — prospect of things reaching the “ demonstrative ” stage of a single low-yield nuclear detonation, perhaps somewhere “safe” such as the Black Sea. I  reckon there is more than enough non-nuclear escalation potential to worry about first.

Putin ’ s mindset and shelf-life
Writing in the FT, Martin Wolf says that “ only bad choices exist. Ukraine cannot be abandoned. We must go on.” The  Defence Secretary Ben Wallace, made this astonishing statement on the BBC: “ Putin is a spent force in the world, his army is done, he is done.” The single biggest issue is Putin ’ s mindset . Thousands of lives are at stake in Ukraine and millions beyond it. All depend on the mentality and subsequent decisions of this single person, and we have no idea where Putin will take us. We should take careful note when John Sawers, former head of MI6, and other wise heads warn that it would be dangerous to corner Putin or indicate that NATO and the West are trying to end his regime.

Experts say that they are stumped about Putin ’ s endgame , now that Russia is regarded as a pariah, is close to being completely removed from the global economic system, and the military have suffered humiliating reversals. Who is going to want to negotiate with Putin? Speculation about palace coups and popular uprising abound. However, given that his leadership model is more Stalin (spire, not pyramid) than other recent Russian leaders, we must assume that he may remain in power for some time. We should brace ourselves in case he lashes out in an attempt to make up for military problems.

The Chinese Conundrum
The day after William Hague wrote in The Times that President Xi was the only leader who could stop the war, Xi spoke with President Macron and Chancellor Scholz and indicated his willingness to help efforts to end the conflict. One month after sealing an eternal friendship pact with Russia, China must be irritated with their new best friend. The last thing President Xi wants is to be closely tied to the world ’ s number one pariah state, or to have Russia crash his growing economic empire, and massive trade dependency on the West.

China will be alarmed at the extent of the Western response and the economic sanctions in particular. The Chinese care about national territorial integrity (no outside meddling with Tibet), and will view this war primarily in terms of its strategic rivalry with the US.

It is in China ’ s self-interest to help achieve an effective ceasefire and a permanent end to this conflict. President Xi ’ s global standing would get a welcome boost, but it is unclear whether Putin, who they consider has gone rogue, can be persuaded.

Is the West still best?
This crisis has shown that liberal democracy has a backbone after all. Mark Rutte, the Dutch PM, hit the spot this week when he said the West had made a terrible mistake for decades, allowing itself to be taken in by Putin and lowering its guard. For sure, if the West had given as much weight to nurturing liberal democracy as it did to free market economics after the disintegration of the USSR, we would be in a much safer place right now. Same goes for climate change. The results of 30 years’ well-funded research into clean local energy generation, transport and storage would be really useful now. So the West has to get serious, mobilising its thinking and leadership powers as never before, to rise to these unprecedentedly challenging and dangerous times.

The West is solidifying and growing into the Alliance of Democracies. It must closely align with and be an enabler of a new overarching global citizenry. A key future battle it must win is for mainstream global public opinion. To do this it has to update its values, and prove that global, not just self-interest is at its heart. It must destroy the growing myth that democracies are not up to the job of managing 21^st century scale challenges.

New Global Order
Whatever happens, after this almighty mess we need a new global order. Surely, this crisis will get us over the tipping point for a revamp of the United Nations and major institutions. Reform of the United Nations Security Council, and removal of the action-blocking veto power of tyrant-led nuclear powers is now essential.

We must not waste the huge opportunities that this dreadful war and human misery will provide. In the UK we should recall that after Dunkirk we removed well over 50 per cent of our senior military commanders, who were judged not up to the job ahead. Sensitive it will be, but not everyone in key positions across our (civilian-heavy) foreign and political-military security structures and organisations will be up to the job ahead, and wise leadership must address this issue.

Whether we all like it or not, the UK is the pivotal European military and security power and bridge with the United States. Brexit is no longer preventing us from working closely again with European partners and we have been out front and leading. But we need to increase our strategic and geopolitical thinking and instruments. Recall the effort we made and our crucial role in preparing for and setting up the UN at pace at the end of WW2. We have plenty of brainpower — bright under-30 year olds at one end, and proven skilled practitioners who have retired but still have much capacity and motivation to help, at the other end.

This nightmare crisis has to be the wake-up call. Are we thinking of pushing for a Tony Blair, Gordon Brown, or William Hague level British successor to Jens Stoltenberg as NATO Secretary General? I hope so.

The UK’s National Security Council structure needs to be beefed up.  The pick of our former military leaders and securocrats should be chairing ad hoc working groups and feeding them into the NSC engine room. We need this vital high level safety mechanism that ensures that current insider groupthink will receive “critical friend” constructive vetting. More hands are needed to the pumps. Following Dame Kate Bingham ’ s vaccine task force model, and her subsequent penetrating critiques of Whitehall and its groupthink, let ’ s involve her in rebooting our machinery of government apparatus and thinking.  

We are entering the third week of the Russia-Ukraine war. The pace of horrors, shocks, and surprises will not slacken awhile. Whilst UK ’ s main effort will be fulfilling our NATO role and helping Ukraine in its hour of need, we also need to be leading the charge for a new world order and revitalised UN and major global institutions. Our in-house structures need to be upgraded and reinforced. Otherwise it won ’ t be long before things get uglier still.

A Message from TheArticle

We are the only publication that’s committed to covering every angle. We have an important contribution to make, one that’s needed now more than ever, and we need your help to continue publishing throughout the pandemic. So please, make a donation.